# C_2019399EN.01002901.xml

| 25.11.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 399/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.11.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 399/29

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Milano (Italy) lodged on 2 September 2019 — KO v Fallimento Consulmarketing SpA

(Case C-652/19)

(2019/C 399/33)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale di Milano

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: KO

Defendant: Fallimento Consulmarketing SpA

Questions referred

| 1. | Do the principles of equal treatment and non-discrimination enshrined in clause 4 of Directive 99/70/EC (1) on employment conditions preclude the legal provisions of Article 1(2) and Article 10 of Decreto Legislativo 23/15 (Legislative Decree No 23/15), which, with regard to collective redundancies that are unlawful due to non-compliance with the selection criteria, provide for a dual and differentiated system of protection whereby in the same procedure appropriate, effective and dissuasive protection is provided for employment relationships of indefinite duration created prior to 7 March 2015 — for which reinstatement and the payment of employer’s contributions are envisaged as possible remedies — yet limited compensation only, between maximum and minimum amounts, is offered for fixed-term employment relationships having the same length of service, in that they were created prior to that date but converted to an open-ended contract after 7 March 2015, which is a less effective and dissuasive form of protection? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Do the principles of equal treatment and non-discrimination enshrined in clause 4 of Directive 99/70/EC (1) on employment conditions preclude the legal provisions of Article 1(2) and Article 10 of Decreto Legislativo 23/15 (Legislative Decree No 23/15), which, with regard to collective redundancies that are unlawful due to non-compliance with the selection criteria, provide for a dual and differentiated system of protection whereby in the same procedure appropriate, effective and dissuasive protection is provided for employment relationships of indefinite duration created prior to 7 March 2015 — for which reinstatement and the payment of employer’s contributions are envisaged as possible remedies — yet limited compensation only, between maximum and minimum amounts, is offered for fixed-term employment relationships having the same length of service, in that they were created prior to that date but converted to an open-ended contract after 7 March 2015, which is a less effective and dissuasive form of protection?

| 2. | Do the provisions contained in Articles 20 and 30 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and in Directive 98/59/EC (2) preclude a legal provision such as Article 10 of Legislative Decree No 23/15 which introduces exclusively for workers hired (or whose fixed-term contract was converted) for an indefinite duration after 7 March 2015 an arrangement whereby, in the event of collective redundancies that are unlawful due to non-compliance with the selection criteria, reinstatement is not an option — unlike for the other similar employment relationships established beforehand and involved in the same procedure — and which instead introduces a concurrent system of compensation only which is insufficient to make good the financial consequences resulting from the loss of employment and which is inferior to the other coexisting model, applied to other workers whose relationships have the same characteristics with the sole exception of the date of conversion or creation? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Do the provisions contained in Articles 20 and 30 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and in Directive 98/59/EC (2) preclude a legal provision such as Article 10 of Legislative Decree No 23/15 which introduces exclusively for workers hired (or whose fixed-term contract was converted) for an indefinite duration after 7 March 2015 an arrangement whereby, in the event of collective redundancies that are unlawful due to non-compliance with the selection criteria, reinstatement is not an option — unlike for the other similar employment relationships established beforehand and involved in the same procedure — and which instead introduces a concurrent system of compensation only which is insufficient to make good the financial consequences resulting from the loss of employment and which is inferior to the other coexisting model, applied to other workers whose relationships have the same characteristics with the sole exception of the date of conversion or creation?

---

(1)  Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP (OJ 1999 L 175, p. 43).

(2)  Council Directive 98/59/EC of 20 July 1998 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies (OJ 1998 L 225, p. 16).

---